Children's Advocacy Centers of Kansas Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208497489
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Wichita, KS, USA
Phone
9137323670
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,093,543
Expenses
$1,095,469
Assets
$408,413
Liabilities
$310,090

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHANIE ANDERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • KASEY DALKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KASEY DALKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $93,641 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The children's advocacy center of Kansas (cacks) is committed to securing appropriate resources for ensuring the healthy establishment and sustainability of Kansas child advocacy centers and the Kansas chapter. Cacks is committed to raising the public profile of the cac/mdt model at local and statewide levels. The organization is committed to being a leader and resource in actively promoting state statutes, partner agency policies and overall practices impacting child maltreatment response and prevention. Cacks is committed to ensuring established and emerging cac's have access to relevant, affordable and accessible technical assistance and trainingopportunities.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provides training and technical assistance to children's advocacy centers in Kansas. There were seventeen cac's (children advocacy centers) served which impacted more than 4,000 children. Cacks provides facilitation, support and collaborative leadership to the cacs in the state.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.1% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $941K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $94K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.